The Meaning, Possibility, and Necessity of Supernatural Revelation

a) Meaning of Supernatural Revelation

1. Nominal definition.—The term revelation is derived from the Latin re-} “hack, from,” and velare, “to veil,” and hence means the drawing back or removal of a veil. The word is, therefore, quite suitably employed to indicate the removal of the “veil” of ignorance which hangs between man’s knowingpowers and the things which he does not know. 2. Real definition.—Revelation is the manifestation of truth hitherto unknown, or known but obscurely. It involves three elements: a) a revealer, i.e., one who makes truth known; b) a truth revealed; and c) a recipient of revelation, i.e., one to whom the revealed truth is manifested. If the revealer is man, the revelation is human; if the revealer is God, the revelation is divine. Divine revelation may be made through the works of God, through creation, in such wise as to be available to man’s unaided knowing-powers, and then it is natural revelation. Again, divine revelation may be made through the word of God, and then it is supernatural revelation. It is of supernatural revelation that we speak in the present Article, even when we use the simple term “revelation’’ without qualifier. Supernatural revelation may be fully defined as a manifestation of truth made by Almighty God to rational creatures in a manner other than that which is usual and natural to them in the acquiring of knowledge. The truth which is revealed is also a determinant in the character of the revelation. If the truth be such that man could know it (and perhaps does know it) without supernatural revelation, but is nevertheless supernaturally revealed, it makes the revelation supernatural in manner, but not in substance. If, however, the truth revealed be of such character that man could not possibly know it without revelation, then the revelation is supernatural in substance as well as in manner. To illustrate: that God exists, man knows by reason arguing from the data of creation; this naturally known truth is also supernaturally revealed; such revelation is supernatural in manner only (i.e., in the manner of its manifestation). That God is one infinite and undivided substance subsisting in Three Persons, is a truth which man could not know unless it were divinely revealed; therefore, its revelation is supernatural in substance as well as in manner. Sometimes the term in form is used for in manner.

b) Possibility of Supernatural Revelation

OF SUPERNATURAL REVELATION If a thing is not possible, this is inevitably due to one of two reasons, viz., (a) there is a contradiction in the very concept or idea of the thing itself, or (&) there is in existence no power great enough to produce, or make, or do the thing. A “square circle” is impossible by the first of these reasons; it is a contradiction in itself; one part of it is a denial of the other, and the result is zero. There is nothing impossible by the second reason if we include the boundless power of Almighty God in our concept of existing powers capable of producing effects. But if there is any indignity, unworthiness, uselessness about the thing, then the boundless power of God cannot produce it, for God is all-perfect, and an unworthy thing would not square with His majesty and dignity; while a useless thing would not square with God’s wisdom. Hence, absolutely speaking God’s power is boundless and can produce anything that is a thing and not a contradiction, which is nothing; but relatively speaking (i.e., with relation to God’s all-perfect nature) certain things which are possible in view of God’s power are not possible in view of His other perfections. We usually put this in another way, and say that all things are possible to God’s absolute power, but not all things are possible to God’s relative power. Now we investigate the subject of supernatural revelation, asking whether it be possible. Certainly, it is possible to God’s absolute power; it is the revealing of truth, and God knows all truth and has the power to manifest it. But is it possible to God’s relative power ? Is there not some indignity in the thought of the all-perfect God revealing truths to men? Not at all; it is no indignity for the wisest teacher to instruct the most ignorant and backward pupil; such an action rather adds to the opinion we hold of the wise teacher: we respect his great knowledge, and when we find him instructing the ignorant we love him for his great kindness. Therefore, there is no indignity in the thought of God teaching men, no unworthiness in such a thought.—But is not revelation a mark of unwisdom in God ? Is it not an evidence that His work of creation is imperfect and incomplete, and that He seeks to correct first omissions by subsequent instructions divinely revealed? God has His own ends; He is not bound to make a thing absolutely perfect in its order, but His wisdom requires that it have that perfection which will make it suited, and admirably suited, to attain the end it was made for. God is not bound to “exhaust” His powers at creation; it belongs to His perfection that He be free to make something new, teach something new, at any time He chooses. Hence revelation is not contrary to God’s wisdom.—But is not revelation useless? How can finite man receive instruction from the infinite? Is it not useless then for the infinite to attempt to reveal truth to finite minds? This objection is rather silly at best. Could not a finite thing stand in the light that poured from an infinite source (if such a source were possible for material light) ? Man’s nature is capable of receiving instruction, man needs instruction; he can receive, according to his capacity, the instruction of even an infinite teacher. The mind of man can grasp truth; it cannot, indeed, have exhaustive knowledge of boundless truth, but it can have knowledge that is quite clear, definite, and distinct, as far as it goes. To illustrate by a rough analogy: a piciture of a man’s face may be beautifully clear and distinct, and it is not an argument against its clarity to say that the picture is not an image of the entire man. We may sum up the whole matter in this way: Revelation is possible if there is nothing to thwart it: (a) on the part of God, the Revealer, or (b) on the part of man, the recipient of the revelation, or (c) on the part of the truth revealed. Now there is nothing to thwart revelation on the part of God, for it does not contradict His wisdom nor His majesty, and He knows all truth and can manifest it as He will. Nor is there anything to thwart revelation on the part of man, for man’s nature is capable of receiving instruction ; man craves knowledge of the truth and can receive it in the measure of his own capacity, even if it come from an infinite source. Finally, there is nothing to thwart revelation on the part of the truth revealed, for truth is essentially a thing that may be manifested. We conclude, then, that revelation is possible. Nay, revelation is not only possible, but probable. We shall presently seek proofs of revelation as a fact, but, even before considering such proofs, we may assert here that the goodness and love of the allperfect Creator toward His children would naturally take form in communications to help and guide them on their journey toward their last end.

In the order of existence, a being is necessary when it is so perfect that it must exist and cannot not-exist. Thus, God is necessary being—the only necessary being. But in the order of requisites for being or action, that is necessary which is indispensable, and without which the being or action cannot exist, or, at least, cannot exist perfectly. It is in the latter sense that we use the term necessary (and necessity) in the present study. We speak here of supernatural revelation as requisite for man’s knowledge of the truths, laws, and practices which constitute objective religion. We have already seen that man has the indispensable obligation of practising religion in order to fulfill the purpose of his being and reach the end for which he was created. Now we say that without revelation man cannot fully know nor well perform his duty of religion. In a word, we say that revelation is necessary. There are degrees of necessity. A thing may be so indispensable that there is simply no doing without it, and then it is said to be absolutely necessary. Again, a thing may be requisite in the sense that to do without it would be extremely difficult, and even well nigh impossible, and then it is said to be morally necessary. We assert: (1) That supernatural revelation is absolutely necessary for the knowledge of the truths of supernatural religion strictly so called; (2) That supernatural revelation is morally necessary for the adequate knowledge of the truths of natural religion. We offer evidence for each assertion: 1. Revelation is absolutely necessary for the knowledge of the truths of supernatural religion, strictly so called (i.e., truths that are supernatural in substance as well as in manner). This assertion is so obvious that it scarcely needs proof. For such truths as we here discuss are precisely those truths that man’s reason cannot work out from the data of creation. If such truths be not revealed, there is no conceivable way in which man can know them. Revelation is, therefore, absolutely necessary for the knowledge of such truths. 2. Revelation is morally necessary for the adequate knowledge of the truths of natural religion. For, although man’s reason could, theoretically speaking, work out these truths from the data of creation, still, in practice, it is certain that reason would not do so. There is great difficulty in the work; and the result would surely be imperfect in any case. We allege difficulty and imperfection, therefore, as our reasons for declaring man’s reason practically insufficient for the attainment of the entire and perfect knowledge of natural religion; and for the same reason we declare revelation morally necessary. Let us look at the matter more closely: a) It would be difficult for man to work out the truths of natural religion by reasoning from the data of creation. All men, indeed, may easily know the existence of God, but the religious truths that are reasoned from God’s existence are arrived at by a process of thought that is at once abstruse and complicated. Not all men have the ability and the education requisite for following and understanding such a process of thought, much less for inaugurating it. And even if man had the ability, it would take long years of study for him to discover all the truths of natural religion; and during those very years he is under strict obligation to practise religion! But even if man had the ability to know all the truths of natural religion in a very brief time, many men would not do so. For many have no taste for serious constructive thought; many others have literally no time for it, so closely are they occupied with the tasks of daily life, the work of obtaining means for food, shelter, and clothing for themselves and their families. Thus, taking the human race by and large, it is quite evident that difficulties which are well nigh insurmountable prevent men from obtaining by natural powers the full knowledge of natural religion. Thus are we justified in declaring that for such full knowledge revelation is morally necessary. b) If man were to work out all the truths of natural religion, surmounting unaided every difficulty, his work would still be imperfect and, in so far, unsuitable for helping him to achieve his last end, which is the very function of religion. For man is likely to make mistakes in his most careful study; error would almost unquestionably be admixed with the truths discovered. As a matter of fact, not one of the greatest of human thinkers, not Plato, not Aristotle, ever achieved a perfect exposition of natural religion. What, then, would be the achievement of the average man? And should a man really attain to a perfect knowledge of natural religion by his unaided efforts, his work would still be imperfect in point of authority. He could not pass it on to others as a completed work. For others might well say, “Why should we accept this man’s word ? He is fallible like ourselves.” And even if the work were perfectly reasoned out and perfectly expressed, it would yet require the individual study (a long hard term of it) and approval of each and every man that accepted it. Divine revelation, with its unquestionable authority, is morally necessary for the full and complete knowledge of the truths of the natural religion.

Summary of the Article

In this Article we have studied the meaning of revelation, defining it both as a name and as a reality, We have distinguished revelation as human and divine; and divine revelation we have distinguished as natural and supernatural. We have discussed the possibility of revelation, and have seen that there is nothing to render it impossible on the part of God, the revealer, or of man, the recipient of revealed truth, or of the truth itself that is revealed. We have asserted the necessity of revelation, and, after a preliminary discussion of necessity, have seen clear and convincing evidence that supernatural revelation is absolutely necessary for a knowledge of the truths of supernatural religion, while it is morally necessary for a knowledge of the truths of the natural religion.